Content
86%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-structured and token-efficient, using compact tables and a decision tree to convey a broad protocol catalog while deferring detail to one-level-deep reference files. Actionability and workflow clarity are strong but slightly held back by high-level ordering steps and an implicit rather than explicit validation/review checkpoint.
Suggestions
Make the ordering workflow's validation loop explicit, e.g. add a step: 'Review the returned feasibility report and price quote; if requirements are unmet, revise parameters/inputs and resubmit before finalizing the order.'
Tighten actionability by noting where each ordering step is performed in the UI (e.g. which page/tab handles parameter configuration and template upload) so the guidance is closer to copy-paste-followable.
Clarify the authentication flow beyond 'account creation or institutional access may be required' (e.g. whether SSO/institutional login is offered or a waitlist applies) so users know what to expect before reaching the protocol catalog.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and table-driven with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the instrument inventory and citation procedure are genuine domain specifics that earn their tokens, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete actionable guidance for an instruction-only web-UI skill (specific URLs, file formats, prices, a decision tree, and per-protocol reference links), but ordering steps such as "Configure parameters" and "Add any special requirements" stay high-level without exact UI navigation; sits just below the fully-executable anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 5-step ordering sequence is present, and the platform-returned feasibility report and price quote serve as an implicit validation gate so the destructive/batch cap at 3 does not apply; the explicit "review the feasibility report, revise and resubmit if needed" checkpoint is not spelled out, keeping it just below the score-5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The SKILL.md is a concise overview that links to 17 real, one-level-deep reference files (all present and correctly referenced) via well-signaled tables, with clear navigation guidance ("Pick a protocol below, then read its reference file"), matching the clear-overview one-level-deep anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |